IBJNews

Man's lawsuit claims Indiana agency broke law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A decision by Indiana's social services agency to stop helping hundreds of severely developmentally disabled people in a Medicaid waiver program pay for food violates state law and forces them to do without other necessities so they can eat, the father of an autistic man on public assistance claims.

Indianapolis attorney Steven Dick filed an administrative appeal with the Family and Social Services Administration in December and again in March on behalf of his 28-year-old son, according to previously unreleased documents provided to The Associated Press.

The food allowance was part of a larger subsidy called the Residential Living Allowance. The agency stopped providing the food allowance in fall 2010. It previously had reduced the allowance for those who receive food stamps — a move that welfare advocates and legal experts said was in violation of federal law. The agency ended the benefit weeks after saying it would stop reducing it.

Dick claimed at the time that the move was retaliation for a related lawsuit he filed against the agency. That lawsuit was later settled out of court.

Spokesman Neal Moore said that the Family and Social Services Administration would not comment on Dick's appeal. But he did say there hadn't been any change in the Residential Living Allowance policy since 2010 and the agency hadn't received any complaints.

An administrative hearing on Dick's appeal that was scheduled for Thursday has been rescheduled for Aug. 22, according to the agency.

The administrative law judge at the hearing could deny Dick's appeal, opening the way for him to file a class-action lawsuit, or find that the policy does violate state law, forcing the agency to pay for groceries.

Reinstating the food allowance would cost the agency an estimated $900,000 at a time when the state is running a $2 billion surplus, much of which comes from money returned by agencies to the state's General Fund, said Erik Gonzalez, a fiscal analyst with the Indiana House Ways and Means Committee.

"For a small amount of money, these people can be appropriately served," Gonzalez said Tuesday. "If they don't have these kinds of supports, they're going to end up in institutions, which will be even more expensive," he added.

After the agency did away with the food allowance, Democratic Rep. William Crawford of Indianapolis sponsored legislation to force the agency to reinstate it, but the bill didn't get a hearing in committee, Gonzalez said.

Now, the only money Dick's son receives for groceries is $173 a month in food stamps, Dick said.

"He's supposed to subsist on that or do without," Dick said. "We've had to cut back and eliminate other things. All he gets is his Social Security and food stamps. If eating more important than new clothes or something else, that's where money has to be put."

Dick's son is enrolled in a state program that provides money to help the developmentally disabled live on their own. Dick said his son lives in an Indianapolis apartment with a roommate who also is autistic. Both function at the 6 or 7-year-old level and are in the same Medicaid waiver program, Dick said.

"They're surviving; they're just living at a sub-poverty level," he said.

Dick claims in his appeal that the agency's decision to do away with the state food benefit nearly two years ago violates an Indiana law that requires the state to cover "the actual costs of room and board expenses" for those in the Medicaid waiver program.

The Sept. 1, 2010, policy statement from the agency includes rent, utilities, telephone and property insurance — but not groceries — as allowable expenses. Gonzalez called the way the agency discontinued the food allowance without mentioning it as "sleight of hand."

At the time the policy was issued, an agency spokesman confirmed that it no longer covered groceries.

"If you're now saying that we're not allowed to include meals, then you're violating the state law," said Dick.

John Dickerson, executive director of The Arc, an advocacy group for Indiana's developmentally disabled, said Tuesday that he wasn't aware of anyone going hungry without the grocery allowance. Indiana requires everyone receiving assistance for developmental disabilities to apply for food stamps. But he acknowledged that many are forced to do without other things to make sure they get enough food, and many are unhappy with the extra bureaucratic step that is now required.

Dickerson said the shift was part of a pattern of trade-offs that resulted from Indiana's effort to conserve state funds by increasing the use of federal programs.

"We're living in a time when unfortunately we have to stretch every dollar as far as we can," he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Wondering
    The child's attorney is his father. Interesting??
  • Wondering
    I realize that all people need food to eat, and I do realize that food costs are going up. However, even those who work every day often have to make a choice between buying groceries or buying something else, such as new clothes. Those who are retired also have to make those choices, medicine/food/roof/heat???, often with the food coming in last place. However, we (the govt) cannot continue on the path that we are now on...the money will run out. I am not in agreement that the persons who function on this development level should be residing on their own. A group home would be a better choice.
  • Only $173 a month?
    I budget $100 a month for food. I do feel bad that the disabled child does not have parents or family members who are able to help him. Or maybe they just aren't willing to help. I wonder if the child's attorney ever thought to help someone else with no regard to the impact of his own wallet.
    • sigh
      I would agree with Andrew. His father is still alive, it is his child, let him care for the guy. I'm sure there are plenty of folks in that situation who have no one to turn to for assistance other than the state. Help THEM. If the parents are still alive and active enough to go around filing law suits, they can assist their children. Grown or not.
    • How about you take care of them
      with the mentality of a 7 year old they are not intelligent enough to live on their own. You (the parents) had them, you pay for their needs and care.
    • ?
      I dont think you read the part where theres a 2 BILLION dollar surplus. 900000 sounds like a lot, but its only .00045% of 2 BILLION dollars.
    • Man's Lawsuit Claim
      I think more details are needed before anyone can pass judgement. What is the cost of rent, are untilities included? Are they eligible for a Section 8 voucher? Is medical care provided? Have they taken advantage of a food bank or checked out the clothing offered by different charitable organizations? Bottom line, it's not always necessary to totally rely on government assistance when there are people and organizations who are available and willing to help.
    • Find A Better Way
      I'm glad that some in state government are willing to say 'No' to the demands of those who drain state resources. I'm sympathetic to the pleas of Mr. Dick and those in similar situations. The article says something I found interesting, "For a small amount of money...". That is the exact problem with so many other states, there are so many "small amounts of money" going for various programs that the result in crushingly large amount that isn't sustainable.
    • Daniels Cronies are bullies
      This guy is qualified to run Purdue. Daniel's and his flunkies are a pathetic bunch. This young man is disabled. Karma is due them.

    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. liek the rest of America

    2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

    3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

    4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

    5. whoa!

    ADVERTISEMENT