IBJNews

Court: Indiana can't deny welfare without reason

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Supreme Court said Thursday that the state Family and Social Services Administration can't deny Medicaid, food stamps or welfare to people without first doing a better job of telling them why.

The unanimous ruling came in a four-year-old class action lawsuit that challenged the way the outsourcing of the state's welfare system dealt with clients. The system has since been modified, but a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which filed the lawsuit in 2008, said the problem persists.

In a 23-page opinion, the justices said FSSA violated applicants' due process rights when it sent them notices that stated their benefits were denied because they had failed to cooperate without citing a specific reason. The 2008 lawsuit argued that the FSSA sent notices denying or cutting off Medicaid, welfare or food stamps because of missing documents in clients' applications, but never told clients which documents were missing.

In one case, the agency cut off Medicaid to a woman with hearing problems and other disabilities after a telephone interview that she had trouble understanding and refused to meet with her in person. The justices said the agency's treatment of the woman violated federal law including the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The woman had wanted to talk with a caseworker, but the ruling said only that FSSA must accommodate her disability but wasn't obligated to provide a caseworker.

"I think a lot of those issues have likely been resolved by the fact that they did get away from the modernization effort and revamped their offices so there is a little more person-to-person contact," ACLU attorney Gavin Rose said.

The woman whose benefits were cut off sued on behalf of all people who applied for or received public benefits from the FSSA. Rose said that could be as many as a million people.

FSSA spokesman Neal Moore said the agency was reviewing the ruling and had no comment.

The modernization effort involving a team of private vendors began in 2007 and introduced call centers, the Internet and fax machines as means to apply for benefits. It took away specific state caseworkers assigned to each household. But Gov. Mitch Daniels canceled the contract with IBM, the main vendor, in 2009 following problems that included lost documents, lengthy hold times for its call centers and too many errors in processing of food stamps and Medicaid.

After Daniels fired IBM, FSSA took its place as the leader among several subcontractors in the automation project and has gradually introduced a new system, dubbing it "hybrid." The system adds more face-to-face caseworker interaction with clients during the welfare application process.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Privacy
    Not only does this system not work it also invades your privacy by including everyone in the household as a group. When your information is sent out everyone who has held that address or phone number information is included in the letter
  • people lie
    I know someone who applyed in two different states gets it lives with her husband so how do they beat the system,don't have to work for their food stamps,but other people do.i wish i was them so i could do the same thing
  • This wont help
    So I get to know in details why I was denied, sweet more failure!

    http://ebtcardbalance.com/
  • Typical
    The state and the gov and the legislature all have the same attitude. The people do not count. The safety net and middle class do not deserve services. The elimiation of the taxes on the rich will help the state prosper. I am sure IBM is laughing as the company sue us.
  • State Supreme Court Medicaid Ruling
    While Medicaid is no longer privatized, the state has opted for a system that forces callers to speak with whoever in the state answers the phone. Despite numerous errors, no one would give me the number of my local office. People on the phone were rude and condescending. Until I contacted my state senator, I could not get my questions answered. This new system is ridiculous.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Steak and Shake USED to be a good place to eat, but the now empty parking spaces tell the story of Poor Service, Declining quality of food and just more gimmicks and rear cooking....I used to be a customer, but no more...won't be back...to many other Good Places to eat in INDY...

  2. This man has continued to destroy the Steak and Shake brand. Did he not learn from the sins of owners past. The SNS logo and Brand are strong, I cant understand why he wants to destroy the brand other than to satisfy his big ego.This will turn out to be a big mistake. Sleek new look for a traditional product..makes no logical sense

  3. I mean REALLY!!! What's next taking away the Burger King's crown, turn the golden arches into silver columns? No I know let's get Wendy a pink mohawk.

  4. A couple of thoughts on some of the information presented here from someone with a bit of experience in this area: First, Does anyone remember a time in the past 35 years when insurance premiums DIDN'T increase? They increase every year. The more rigorous rate review requirements of the Affordable Care Act (effective in 2011) have likely caused those increases to moderate as they have averaged below 10% for the past few years, down from much higer averages in prior years. Second, Oregon will operate a state-based Exchange. Recently, they were one of the first states to release their proposed (not yet reviewed by regulators)premium rates -- our first view of Exchange rates. After 2 insurers saw their competitors' rates, they pulled theirs back and re-submitted LOWER rates. In my nearly 10 years as a state insurance regulator, and two years as a federal regulator, I don't ever recall an insurer voluntarily lowering its rates. THAT'S the kind of transparency and competition the online marketplaces (Exchanges) will bring about. 3) ...and this is just a random thought: A big concern among health policy experts is the capacity of the primary care provider community to handle the happy fact that a large number of individuals will be newly-insured under the Affordable Care Act. With the system being stretched so thin for INSURED individuals, It seems highly doubtful that more than a very few "cash-and-carry" physicians will be able to survive in the new, improved healthcare system. Sally McCarty Center on Health Insurance Reform Georgetown University Health Policy Institute

  5. liek the rest of America

ADVERTISEMENT