Olmstead Cases - Supportive Housing Providers Association

Lisa Bragança
Access Living
[email protected]
(312) 640-2175
1971 First Center for Independent Living
by people with disabilities for people with
Individual and Systems
Information and
Peer Support
Independent Living
Skills Training
Independent Living Staff work to:
End the unnecessary institutionalization
of people with disabilities
Improve/expand services and programs
that allow people with disabilities to live
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
The ADA prohibits discrimination on the
basis of disability in employment, state and
local government, public accommodations,
commercial facilities, transportation, and
ADA Title II regulations require public entities
“administer services, programs, and activities
in the most integrated setting appropriate
to the needs of qualified individuals with
Most integrated setting is one that “enables
individuals with disabilities to interact with
nondisabled persons to the fullest extent
possible . . . .”
28 C.F.R. § 35.130(d) and 28 C.F.R. Pt. 35, App. A (2010) (addressing
§ 35.130).
ADA prohibits the unjustified segregation of
individuals with disabilities.
Public entities are required to provide
community-based services to persons with
disabilities when:
◦ such services are appropriate;
◦ the affected persons do not oppose communitybased treatment; and
◦ community-based services can be reasonably
accommodated, taking into account the resources
available to the entity and the needs of others who
are receiving disability services from the entity.
Olmstead v. L.C.
“[I]nstitutional placement of
persons who can handle and benefit
from community settings
perpetuates unwarranted
assumptions that persons so
isolated are incapable or unworthy
of participating in community life.”
“[C]onfinement in an institution
severely diminishes the everyday
life activities of individuals,
including family relations, social
contacts, work options, economic
independence, educational
advancement, and cultural
From 1999 through 2005, no
meaningful response from
State officials
Disability advocates
formulated a plan to file
lawsuits to enforce Olmstead
Three lawsuits required
because different
administrative agencies
oversee different populations
of people with disabilities
living in different types of
Lawsuits brought by coalition:
- Access Living
- Equip for Equality
- ACLU of Illinois
- Pro bono counsel:
SNR Denton
Kirkland & Ellis
State of Illinois has settled all three
cases by entering into “Consent
“Consent Decrees” are negotiated settlements that
must be approved by the Court after a “fairness
Consent Decrees have been approved by
the Court after fairness hearings
Williams v. Quinn (“Williams”)
- Approximately 4,300 Medicaid-eligible adults
throughout Illinois who:
- have serious mental illness
- live in IMDs (Institutes of Mental Disease)
- with appropriate supports and services can
live in the community
Williams case
- Independent Evaluations
- Person-Centered Planning
- Expanded service array
(Medicaid and non-Medicaid services)
- Savings for State of Illinois
Williams case
◦ Over the next five years all IMD residents who wish to
live in the community and who can do so with
appropriate services can move into the community
◦ Benchmarks
 By June 30, 2012, 256 IMD residents moved into the
community (first year)
 640 IMD residents by the second year
 40% of IMD residents by the third year
 70% of IMD residents by the fourth year
 100% of IMD residents by the fifth year
◦ Provide funding for rental assistance and transition
Ligas v. Maram (“Ligas”)
- Nearly 6,000 adults throughout Illinois
- with developmental disabilities
- who live in large private ICF-DDs (9 or more
residents) or who live at home and are “at risk
of institutionalization”
- who have expressed a desire to move out of
the ICF-DD into a more integrated community
Colbert v. Quinn (“Colbert”)
- Approximately 17,000 Medicaid-eligible
adults in Cook County who:
- have a physical disability or serious
mental illness
- live in nursing facilities
- with appropriate supports and services
can live in the community
Colbert case
◦ Meet measurable benchmarks for
transitioning people into the community
 During the first 30 months, 1,100 people who wish to
live in the community and who can do so with
appropriate services will be transitioned out of
nursing facilities
 During the first 18 months, have independent
professionals conduct assessments of at least 2,000
class members
Colbert case
$10 million in housing assistance along with funds
for transition costs and home modifications
◦ Develop community capacity
◦ Develop accessible, affordable housing stock
◦ Develop a cost neutral plan based upon phase 1
Williams case
With limited exceptions, Permanent Supportive
Housing (“PSH”) is considered the most integrated
setting for class members.
Integrated permanent housing with tenancy rights,
linked with flexible community-based services that
are available to consumers when they need them,
but are not mandated as a condition of tenancy.
Williams case
Year 1
(ending June 30, 2012)
Secure 256 units of PSH
Year 2
(ending June 30, 2013)
Secure additional 384 units of PSH for a total of
640 units.
Permanent Supportive Housing can be:
- scattered site – preferred
- site-based
- enhanced property management
- master leasing
Capital Funding sources:
- Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)
- Building Illinois Bond Fund $130 million
- Illinois Affordable Housing Trust Fund
- Community Development Block Grant
- HOME Investment Partnership
Rental Assistance:
Bridge Subsidy – expedited basis for Williams
$10 million funding for Colbert
Transition and Home Modification

similar documents