Petition Closed

End bias against disabled

This petition had 151 supporters

End institutional bias against disabled via health care reform, etc.   :)



ADAPT Actions: Action in 25 Cities, how you can join in; etc..   :)



National ADAPT Action in 25 Cities! How you can join in   :)

ADAPT hit Democratic Party in 25 cities across the US today.  This was to show the outrage at the Democrats lack of real support for the Community Choice Act (despite their lip service), to get them to act now to support ending the institutional bias via health care reform, and get an apology for the lives stolen by the past 40 years of insitutional bias created by the Democrats to begin with.  Here are some highlights from the Tweets and twitters

Check out ADAPT's response to the Democrats' ad supporting health care reform  and see how you can take action!   :)


Check out ADAPT's response to the Democrats' ad supporting health care reform   :)

to take action go to   :)


Twitter Highlights so far:  (to read more go to   )

DC ADAPTers were removed WITHOUT arrest and are now camping out all night at the DNC. Three people were carried out.  How do you spell kick-ass? A-D-A-P-T!

Missoula advocates have left baucus' office with an email promising a meeting with baucus

Michigan left the Michigan Democratic Party with a commitment for a meeting on monday. - Pat Waak, Colorado Democratic Chair meets with 24 ADAPT activists. Dawn gives her the demands.

I'd rather go to jail than die in a nursing home!about 4 hours ago from web

Wisconsin is still at the state democrats headquarters in madison (4:30 pm)

WI ADAPT NEEDS YOUR HELP!! Call of Fax the Democrats, and tell them Everyone deserves access to Health Care P 608 255 5172 Fx 608 255 8919

Montana's chief of staff contacted the DNC and sent info about our demands

chicago won letter to dnc, meeting w mayor next week, and call to valerie jarrett. we r out of city hall! go DC!!!

El Paso: Exended their visit with Ms. Rose, talked about Community and personal stories, she was understanding. Local paper interviewed us

NM : Before Baucus shut off the fax, CIL was also informed by police that if they didnt stop faxing their fax would be confiscated

Spoof video of Democrats 'it's time' health care video, please watch & forward to friends and family.

Kansas - Handing out flyers, encouraging folks to call Democrat Headquarters,

adapt of tn has gotten cohen to write and send in letter to dnc

michigan adapt is asking that people call brewer the dem at 15173712056 to tell him to stop ignoring constituents

Washington : got to meet with Larry Roberts, Sen. Advisor to Tim Kaine. He said they were not focused on those issues right now.

Utica - Met with Michael Arcuri's staff and the feel he will sign on, they are going to follow up with the congressman.

utah got their letter faxed in. albany working on a conf call. chicago mayor staff still cant get mayor...

Rochester: Success in rochester! Joe Morelle faxed a letter to washington to the democratic national committee
and agreed to hold a meeting to discuss the concerns of adapt.

San Jose - Four corners ADAPT, loud and proud outside of Democrat Headquarters. ADAPT actioners at Democratic headquarters in New Mexico

Albany/NYC - Edgar Santana will be faxing information to washington on their behalf.

Minnesota - Waiting to meet with Joanne, who is Colin Pettersons aid to discuss list of demands.

the main number for the dnc in dc is 202 863 8000. why not give them a call to pass the cca?

Austin Texas: 21 people in Democrat Office - awaiting teleconference with chairperson Boyd Ritchie to fax the demands...

missoula adapt is on kpax tv

albany ny dems working w adapt there to pass on demands


For Immediate release:  July 21, 2009

For information contact:
Bruce Darling 585-370-6690
Marsha Katz 406-544-9504

Disability Rights Activists Nationwide Confront Democrats On Institutional Bias

Washington, D.C.---Demanding an end to the institutional bias in the nation's health care policy, ADAPT, the nation's largest cross-disability, grassroots disability rights organization, took their fight to the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in Washington, DC, with 24 simultaneous protests at Democratic offices across the country, and at Senator Max Baucus' office in Missoula, MT.

ADAPT is calling for Congress to eliminate the Medicaid institutional bias in 2009 - either in health care reform or as separate legislation, specifically the Community Choice Act (CCA). CCA (S683/HR1670) allows people to choose to stay at home to receive long-term services and supports instead of being forced into nursing homes and institutions because that's what the law will currently pay for.

The protesters are additionally demanding that the Democrats apologize for the loss of freedom suffered by countless Americans that resulted when a Democratically-controlled Congress created the institutional bias over 40 years ago; and that the DNC facilitate an immediate meeting between ADAPT and Senator Max Baucus, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee; Representative Henry Waxman, Chair of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce; and Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison, to develop a plan to pass the Community Choice Act and eliminate the institutional bias in 2009.

"For 44 years, Medicaid's institutional bias has stolen the lives of Americans with disabilities and older Americans," said Mike Oxford, ADAPT organizer from Topeka, KS. It has deprived them of their most basic freedoms. The Democrats were in power when that bias was legislated. Now it's time for them to apologize, and most importantly, it's time for them to take action and fix it."

ADAPT's action nationwide comes in part as a response to a video released last week by the Democratic National Committee. The video tells Americans "It's time" for health care reform, and urges them to call their Senators. Picking up on that theme, ADAPT released its own video this week telling the Democrats "It's time" to eliminate the institutional bias and pass the Community Choice Act.  See

"The Democrats say they want health care reform to focus on covering more people and saving money," said Cassie James, ADAPT organizer from Philadelphia, "yet they refuse to change the current law that mandates people receive long term care in the most expensive setting rather than less expensively at home where they would rather be. In addition, the current law forces states to go through complicated procedures just to let a few people stay at home and get assistance there."

Many states have no home and community-based services, or they may provide limited services with waiting lists that keep people stuck for years in institutions and nursing facilities before they have any chance of getting services. It is not uncommon for people to wait so long that they die before their name reaches the top of the waiting list.

In an unprecedented show of unity this year, disability and aging groups across the country have demanded that healthcare reform be the vehicle to change federal policy which favors paying for institutions over community based services. They have repeatedly asked Congress and the President to pass the Community Choice Act, but currently, NO proposal in the health care reform package eliminates the institutional bias in Medicaid.

"The Democrats have historically supported the Community Choice Act every time it has been introduced in Congress," said Dawn Russell, an ADAPT organizer from Denver, CO. "Many in the disability community were optimistic that the Democrats would finally pass CCA and eliminate the institutional bias, but the Democratic leadership in Washington is doing absolutely nothing. It seems as though the Democrats are so concerned with political maneuvering that they have completely forgotten about the people they represent who have no voice in Washington."

"ADAPT is concerned about people who right now are stuck in nursing facilities and other institutions. We are concerned about people on Medicaid who will continue to be forced into those places if the law isn't changed. And if the Democratic leadership won't speak up for them, then I will," added Russell.


Local Press Contacts in ADAPT Cities

Washington, DC.................................. Diane Coleman, 708-420-0539

Denver, CO.......................................... Babs Johnson, 303-618-9721

Hartford, CT.........................................Joe Stramondo, 203-525-2880

Wilmington, DE.......................... Daniese McMullin-Powell, 302-507-7546

Atlanta, GA.................................. Cheri Mitchell, 678-755-6015

Chicago, IL................................... Jim Glozier, 724-344-0494 or Monica Heffner, 312-404-6021

Topeka, KS.................................. Kevin Siek, 785-207-6508

Annapolis, MD............................ Cheryl Gottlieb, 301-758-4473

Lansing, MI................................ Susan Fitzmaurice, 248-767-2217

Red Lake Falls, MN.................. Gordie Haug, 218-779-8210

Saint Louis, MO........................... Michelle Steger, 314-229-7435

Missoula, MT.............................. Marsha Katz, 406-544-9504

Albuquerque, NM.................. Patti Zeigler, 505-516-5775

Albany, NY.............................. Dan Hazen, 202-340-4372

Cortland, NY........................... Susan Ruff, 607-761-7557

New York, NY........................ Julie Maury, 646-290-8895

Rochester, NY......................... Mary Willoughby, 585-402-8496

Utica, NY................................. Susan Ruff, 607-761-7557

Harrisburg, PA...................... Linda Anthony, 570-449-4501

Philadelphia, PA.................... Cassie James, 215-219-0694

Memphis, TN........................... Randy Alexander, 901-359-4982

Austin, TX....................................... Danny Saenz, 512-971-5311 or David Wittie, 512-577-8982

El Paso, TX..................................... Frank Lozano, 915-316-9471

Salt Lake City, UT............................ Jerry Costley, 801-347-0370

Madison, WI............................ Steve Verriden, 608-566-6429



CCA Co-sponsor list still growing   :)
New Folks signed on to CCA (We are up to 106 in the House!) :

Sen Collins, Susan M. [ME] - 6/18/2009

Rep Kanjorski, Paul E. [PA-11] - 6/26/2009
Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] - 6/26/2009
Rep Rahall, Nick J., II [WV-3] - 7/9/2009
Rep Kilroy, Mary Jo [OH-15] - 7/13/2009
Rep Latham, Tom [IA-4] - 7/13/2009
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] - 7/13/2009
Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] - 7/13/2009
Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] - 7/14/2009
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 7/14/2009
Rep Sessions, Pete [TX-32] - 7/17/2009
Rep Murphy, Tim [PA-18] - 7/17/2009


ALL co-sponsors by state:

ALABAMA                         AL
Rep Bonner, Jo [AL-1] - 3/30/2009

ALASKA                          AK
Sen Begich, Mark [AK] - 6/8/2009

Rep Young, Don [AK] - 5/12/2009

AMERICAN SAMOA                  AS
Rep Faleomavaega, Eni F.H. [AS] - 6/9/2009

ARIZONA                         AZ
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 3/25/2009
Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] - 6/26/2009

ARKANSAS                        AR

CALIFORNIA                      CA
Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 4/23/2009

Rep Davis, Susan A. [CA-53] - 3/25/2009
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 3/23/2009
Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-47] - 3/23/2009
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 4/1/2009
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 4/29/2009
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 5/4/2009
Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-35] - 6/17/2009

COLORADO                        CO
Sen Bennet, Michael F. [CO] - 3/24/2009
Sen Udall, Mark [CO] - 5/7/2009

Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] - 3/25/2009
Rep Perlmutter, Ed [CO-7] - 3/30/2009
Rep Polis, Jared [CO-2] - 3/25/2009

CONNECTICUT                     CT
Sen Dodd, Christopher J. [CT] - 3/24/2009
Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT] - 4/23/2009

Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] - 3/23/2009
Rep Larson, John B. [CT-1] - 3/23/2009
Rep Courtney, Joe [CT-2] - 4/1/2009
Rep Murphy, Christopher S. [CT-5] - 6/11/2009

DELAWARE                        DE
Sen Kaufman, Edward E. [DE] - 5/7/2009

Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 5/12/2009

FLORIDA                         FL
Rep Meek, Kendrick B. [FL-17] - 4/22/2009
Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 6/16/2009
Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] - 7/13/2009
Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] - 7/14/2009

GEORGIA                         GA
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 3/23/2009
Rep Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [GA-2] - 5/7/2009
Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [GA-4] - 5/13/2009

GUAM                            GU

HAWAII                          HI
Sen Inouye, Daniel K. [HI] - 3/31/2009

Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 4/22/2009

IDAHO                           ID

ILLINOIS                        IL
Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] - 3/24/2009

** Sponsor: Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] (introduced 3/23/2009)
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 3/25/2009
Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 4/27/2009
Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 4/27/2009

INDIANA                         IN
Rep Visclosky, Peter J. [IN-1] - 4/22/2009
Rep Ellsworth, Brad [IN-8] - 5/12/2009

IOWA                            IA
Sponsor: Sen Harkin, Tom [IA]

Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] - 3/25/2009
Rep Latham, Tom [IA-4] - 7/13/2009

KANSAS                          KS
Sen Roberts, Pat [KS] - 4/1/2009

Rep Moore, Dennis [KS-3] - 3/23/2009
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 3/25/2009
Rep Jenkins, Lynn [KS-2] - 5/7/2009

KENTUCKY                        KY

LOUISIANA                       LA

MAINE                           ME
Sen Collins, Susan M. [ME] - 6/18/2009

Rep Pingree, Chellie [ME-1] - 6/3/2009

MARYLAND                        MD
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 3/30/2009

MASSACHUSETTS                   MA
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 3/24/2009
Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 3/24/2009

Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 3/23/2009
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 3/25/2009
Rep Delahunt, Bill [MA-10] -  6/11/2009

MICHIGAN                        MI
Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] - 3/24/2009

Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 4/28/2009
Rep Kildee, Dale E. [MI-5] - 5/4/2009

MINNESOTA                       MN
Rep Peterson, Collin C. [MN-7] - 4/28/2009
Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 6/11/2009

MISSISSIPPI                     MS
Rep Thompson, Bennie G. [MS-2] - 6/8/2009

MISSOURI                        MO
Rep Carnahan, Russ  [MO-3] - 6/15/2009

MONTANA                         MT
Sen Tester, Jon [MT] - 3/24/2009

NEBRASKA                        NE

NEVADA                          NV

NEW HAMPSHIRE                   NH
Rep Hodes, Paul W. [NH-2] - 4/22/2009
Rep Shea-Porter, Carol [NH-1] - 5/18/2009

NEW JERSEY                      NJ
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 4/23/2009

Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 3/23/2009
Rep Smith, Christopher H. [NJ-4] - 4/22/2009
Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-8] - 4/27/2009

Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] - 7/13/2009

NEW MEXICO                      NM

NEW YORK                        NY
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 3/24/2009
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [NY] - 3/24/2009

Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] - 3/25/2009
Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] - 3/23/2009
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] - 3/23/2009
Rep Massa, Eric J. J. [NY-29] - 3/31/2009
Rep McHugh, John M. [NY-23] - 3/25/2009
Rep Meeks, Gregory W. [NY-6] - 3/23/2009
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] - 3/25/2009
Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] - 3/25/2009
Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] - 3/25/2009
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] - 3/25/2009
Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] - 3/23/2009
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 4/22/2009
Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [NY-1] - 5/13/2009
Rep King, Peter T. [NY-3] - 5/4/2009
Rep Towns, Edolphus  [NY-10] - 6/11/2009
Rep Maffei, Daniel B. [NY-25] - 6/11/2009
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 7/14/2009

NORTH CAROLINA                  NC

NORTH DAKOTA                    ND


OHIO                            OH
Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] - 3/24/2009

Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 3/23/2009
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 3/23/2009
Rep Kilroy, Mary Jo [OH-15] - 7/13/2009

OKLAHOMA                        OK

OREGON                          OR

PENNSYLVANIA                    PA
Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 3/24/2009
Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. [PA] - 3/24/2009

Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1] - 3/23/2009
Rep Carney, Christopher P. [PA-10] - 3/23/2009
Rep Doyle, Michael F. [PA-14] - 3/23/2009
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 3/23/2009
Rep Gerlach, Jim [PA-6] - 3/31/2009
Rep Murphy, Patrick J. [PA-8] - 3/31/2009
Rep Murtha, John P. [PA-12] - 3/30/2009
Rep Platts, Todd Russell [PA-19] - 3/30/2009
Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] - 3/23/2009
Rep Sestak, Joe [PA-7] - 3/23/2009
Rep Altmire, Jason [PA-4] - 4/27/2009
Rep Pitts, Joseph R. [PA-16] - 4/29/2009
Rep Dent, Charles W. [PA-15] - 6/9/2009
Rep Holden, Tim [PA-17] -  6/11/2009

Rep Kanjorski, Paul E. [PA-11] - 6/26/2009
Rep Murphy, Tim [PA-18] - 7/17/2009

PUERTO RICO                     PR

RHODE ISLAND                    RI
Rep Langevin, James R. [RI-2] - 3/23/2009
Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] - 3/31/2009

SOUTH CAROLINA                  SC

SOUTH DAKOTA                    SD
Sen Johnson, Tim [SD] - 3/31/2009

TENNESSEE                       TN
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 3/23/2009
Rep Gordon, Bart [TN-6] - 3/30/2009

TEXAS                           TX
Rep Reyes, Silvestre [TX-16] - 3/25/2009
Rep Green, Gene [TX-29] - 4/1/2009
Rep Gonzalez, Charles A. [TX-20] - 5/21/2009

Rep Sessions, Pete [TX-32] - 7/17/2009

UTAH                            UT

VERMONT                         VT
Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 3/24/2009

VIRGIN ISLANDS                  VI
Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] - 3/23/2009

VIRGINIA                        VA
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 3/25/2009
Rep Connolly, Gerald E. "Gerry" [VA-11] - 5/18/2009

WASHINGTON                      WA
Sen Murray, Patty [WA] - 4/23/2009

WEST VIRGINIA                   WV
Rep Rahall, Nick J., II [WV-3] - 7/9/2009

WISCONSIN                       WI
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 3/23/2009
Rep Kind, Ron [WI-3] - 3/23/2009

WYOMING                         WY


ADAPT's comments on HUD Proposed NOFA for Rental vouchers for people transitioning out & people with disabilities   :)
Below are ADAPT's complete comments on the proposed NOFA for Housing Vouchers for people transitioning out of nursing homes and other institutions, and for people with disabilities.  These are based on the talking points we sent out earlier.  We urge you to comment on this proposed NOFA!  These vouchers are critical for helping people transition, and while they are a BIG step forward,
they also need some changes to work effectively.

You can email comments to   :)


If you want to read the complete proposed regulations use this link   :)

You can include some or all in of ADAPT's points in your comments if you like,
but please comment!  If nothing else, tell them how important these vouchers
are, and if you have a personal story to
illustrate your points, feel free to add that.


U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Public and Indian Housing,

Housing Voucher Management and Operations Division

451 7th Street, SW

Room 4210

Washington, D.C. 20410

ATTN: Phyllis Smelkinson

Docket No. FH-5332-N-01

Proposed Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for HUD's Fiscal Year (FY) 2009
Rental Assistance for Non-Elderly Persons with Disabilities; Request for

The following comments are submitted by ADAPT, a national disability rights
organization, whose intent is to end the institutional bias in Medicaid,
allowing persons to choose where they live as an alternative to the nursing
home/institution mandate by the Medicaid program. Local groups of ADAPT and
other disability organization which have similar goals have realized for years
that one of the biggest barriers to people living in their community is the
availability of accessible, affordable, integrated housing. Since FY 2000
ADAPT has been asking HUD for vouchers to help people transition out of
nursing homes, and until now all we have been able to get is 400 vouchers.
During the development of the New Freedom Initiative to help people of all
ages with disabilities integrate into the community HUD was noticeably absent
and now, 10 years after the Supreme Court's Olmstead decision HUD is
noticeably behind the curve.  The Year of Community Living President Obama
declared recently will have little substance if there is nowhere to live in
the community.

The addition of the proposed 4,000 vouchers in this proposed NOFA will assist
individuals to move, and organizations assisting them to deal with, the
affordability and integrated notions of desired housing.  ADAPT applauds HUD
and this Administration for focusing on trying to address the housing crisis
for persons with disabilities, especially who are non-elderly, as the comments
will indicate, however, this is but a "drop in the bucket" for what is really
needed.  We hope this is only the beginning of a more ongoing, comprehensive
effort.   We are also concerned because at the same time, it could be
difficult to get qualified Public Housing Authorities to apply for even this
small number because of some of the requirements in the proposed NOFA.
Without their cooperation, this effort will fail.


Overview Information-G. 1.  There are several concerns with this point:

1)      The proposed eligibility criteria require that all persons for
Category 1 or 2 be on a Public Housing Authority's (PHAs) waiting list, and
Category 2 persons be "assisted through a preference as stated in the PHA's
Administrative Plan for transitioning persons from institutions."   It is our
experience that many waiting lists across the country have not been open for
many years (sometimes as much as a decade or longer), that people move because
of various circumstances and miss their opportunity to stay on waiting lists
when the PHA sends out their "renewal or confirmation" letter to maintain
their status on the waiting list.   Also, some people, due to their
disabilities, often don't understand what the PHA is asking for and miss
opportunity to keep their place on the waiting list.  Additionally, people who
would be eligible for Category 2 HCV's  often have no way of even getting on
the list and, if they do, are certainly at risk of missing letters from PHAs
due to their "place of residence." (Nursing homes and other institutions often
don't deliver mail and/or intimidate people when they learn of these people's
plans to leave.)  Last but not least, it is extremely rare for a PHA to have a
preference for persons who would be eligible for Category 2 HCVs and the plan
reference in these regulations and virtually unheard of by ADAPT members and
others involved in transitioning people out into the community.

Some communities, in desperate need to address the Category 2 population and
without help from HUD or the various administrations of the past decade,
created "bridge vouchers" with HOME, CDBG and other funding streams; but these
vouchers are time limited to a year or two, and leave the recipients extremely
vulnerable to being re-institutionalized.

Recommendation: ADAPT recommends that HUD eliminate the waiting list and
preference language in this future NOFA.  ADAPT feels that HUD should make it
as easy as possible for non-elderly disabled families to be eligible for these
new HCVs and that outreach should be made to persons who have identified
themselves as disabled who are on the waiting list, but also to accept persons
who are referred by organizations that work with persons with disabilities and
be eligible for Category 1 HCVs.  Because most PHAs have done away with any
preference dealing with disability, ADAPT feels that this requirement on PHAs
must be abolished here, as many PHAs would feel it not worth applying if they
do not have this preference.  HUD could encourage PHAs to establish, or
re-establish, a preference for future NOFAs, but should not for this NOFA (for
either Category 1 or EVEN MORE SO FOR Category 2 HCVs).  It is ridiculous to
require this for Category 2 persons.

ADAPT agrees that PHAs should be encouraged to create a priority in Category 1
for persons at-risk of being institutionalization. If someone demonstrates
they are at-risk because of a "housing need", PHAs should be able encouraged
to provide a Category 1 HCV to such individual, whether or not they have been
on the waiting list, at present time or ever.

ADAPT does feel that those PHAs that using "bridge vouchers" for persons who
are on a waiting list or waiting for permanent accessible housing should move
non-elderly disabled families to the top of the list for these Category 1 & 2

HUD has determined that all of these vouchers are for "non-elderly" families
with disabilities. We assume this is an effort to meet the inequities still
felt from the 202 program that allowed persons with disabilities to be
displaced from their housing (supposedly alternative accessible housing was
available, but we know that not to necessarily be the case). ADAPT would hope
that in the future, HUD would make its programs available to all persons and
do away with providing dollars to programs based on disability/age
characteristics.  But since we are still trying to "catch up on lost housing,"
we agree that Category 1 HCVs should be for non-elderly disabled families

Recommendation: Over 85% of people in nursing homes are over 65 years old, and
in states like Texas with a long track record with Money Follows the Person,
two thirds of those getting out are over age 65.  Because people of all ages
are inappropriately placed in nursing homes and other institutional settings,
ADAPT would urge that the Category 2 HCVs be for persons or families (or
"elderly or non-elderly family) regardless of age, but still meeting the
disability definition.

II. Award Information

A.1. Maximum Voucher Request:

If all HCVs are not awarded in this program during the NOFA period, ADAPT
would recommendations in two ways to fully utilize the program. First, if
there are applicants who are deemed "marginally" not eligible, HUD should
contact those organizations to determine if there are ways to help them become
eligible. Because this is a new program and it has been a long time since
similar vouchers were made available, this would be an excellent way to help
ensure success of the program. Secondly, if there are still vouchers/funding
available, determine if successful applicants would consider taking a larger
number of vouchers. Again, we hope that HUD has the same interest in the
success of this program as ADAPT does.

A.      Available Funds.

ADAPT supports putting any additional funds toward this NOFA (from other
programs, if funding is not totally exhausted) as the need is very great!  If
there is additional funding, these should be allocated for both Category 1 & 2
vouchers, and should be determined by the demand from applicants for the
different HCVs (i.e. if Category 1 HCV runs out of money and Category 2 does
not, or does not have as significant a demand, then excess funds should go to
Category 1; or, if Category 2 HCVs applications are significantly more than
for Category 1 (proportionately), then Category 2 should get the additional
funding, or a higher percentage of additional funding.)

Full Text of Announcement

I.        Funding Opportunity Description

       D. Definitions-4. Nursing homes and/or Other Institutions

Recommendation: We feel that HUD should include "nursing home" in the
definition of "Nursing Home and/or Other Institutions" and further,
specifically make "assisted living facilities" ineligible for this program and
include them in the example of program types NOT eligible.

Eligibility Information


HUD is proposing that once Category 1 and Category 2 HCVs are no longer in use
by the original user, that HCV can now be used as a Category 1 HCV.

Recommendation: ADAPT strongly disagrees with this strategy and until we can
determine that all persons in nursing homes and other institutions have equal
access to accessible, affordable, integrated housing, Category 2 vouchers
should remain as Category 2 HCVs.  In addition, ADAPT strongly urges HUD to
develop a plan to track these vouchers by Category (who received them, how
many they received, how many they used, for whom, the turnover rate, etc.)
This will  assist in determining how many more of these HCVs are necessary, if
changes to the program need to be made to better utilize the program, if some
PHAs are not fully utilizing the HCVs or inappropriately using the vouchers,
among other possible uses for such tracking. This would have helped with the
old Fair Share and Mainstream Voucher program fiascos.

Commitment for Supportive Services-located in various sections

While it says at one point that participants are not required to accept
services, In at least 8 places in this Proposal for NOFA, there are comments
made reflecting the need for certain persons to receive supportive services to
ensure persons/families in maintaining their housing, as well as good health
and/or PHAs need to ensure supportive services for these individuals. We
anticipate this comes from the collaborative intent of the "Year of Community
Living" declared by President Obama and the connection with the Department of
Health and Human Services Money Follows the Person program.  While we applaud
the intent of HUD in this area, we strongly believe services should not be
tied to housing.  In addition, we have some serious concerns that HUD is
placing PHAs in situations where they don't want to be-providing non-housing
support services, even if this is just perceived. In addition, Only 29 states
have MFP programs and by reports from our "membership," many of these MFP
programs are still coming up to speed and are still not working the way they
were intended.  Why do PHAs need to demonstrate previous experience with
persons with disabilities?  Why shouldn't they just need to demonstrate an
interest in the goals of this NOFA?

Recommendation: ADAPT feels that this proposal would make much more sense to
have PHAs get letters of commitment from various organizations (Centers for
Independent Living, Area Agencies on Aging and other community organizations
that work with persons with disabilities, especially those in nursing homes
and other institutions) to collaborate on this effort, to get referrals for
use of these HCVs, to potentially contact or refer HCV users to these
organizations for services and supports. It is extremely important that
housing and services are not connected, or even perceived to be connected, by
the users or the PHAs.  Very significantly, in most cases this is going to be
a new collaboration and, therefore, a "history" of a working relationship
should not be mandatory.

Eligible Applicants-Organizations other than PHAs being able to apply for
these HCVs.

Recommendation: In many states,  the"Housing Authority" responsible for
applying  for this Voucher Program, is also the obstacle to many innovative
programs.  ADAPT would urge HUD to allow other non-profit community
organizations that work in the arena of providing housing to be able to apply
for these Vouchers, which might mean changing the eligibility criteria to
enable this to occur.

Extension of Comment Period:

ADAPT would encourage HUD to extend the time period for collecting comments on
this Proposal for NOFA so that ADAPT and other organizations have an
opportunity to contact their local and state PHAs and other interested housing
providers to get their input on some of the concerns mentioned in these
comments. There may be other programmatic or eligibility criteria that PHAs
have that we are not aware of because we do not provide housing and don't
apply for these types of grants. We would hope that HUD wants this to be a
very successful program, and to do so, more information may be needed.

NATIONAL ADAPT MAILING LIST - Adapt Community Choice Act List   :)

Today: james is counting on you

james nordlund needs your help with “End bias against disabled”. Join james and 150 supporters today.