Hutchinson:

• 30 non-SRS participants attended along with our local Leadership Team. Participants represented MHC, Homeless Shelter, Reno County, CDDO, Council on Aging, Foster Care contractor, Early Child Educational Center, Mcpherson County, child care, etc.
• Attendees indicated it was a success, that they believe they received pertinent and current information about the budget, and the results of the legislative session. They praised Director Goosen's video and the opportunity to ask questions, get some answers and make comments!
• Rep Mary Kauffman attended and indicated the meeting went well.
• Several times the room was silent as participants began to realize that revenues are really truly down and the local community needs to plan differently in the future.

Questions and Comments:

• Are you at the 5 yr mark for Temporary Assistance to Families?
• There will be changes in SSI benefits - possibility of additional medical coverage, etc.
• Will there be changes because of changes to the waiting list for the FE waiver?
• Are Foster Care caseloads increasing? Continued problems with contractors?
• How will the sliding fee scale be implemented for MH Waiver?
• We have depleted churches because of medication requests and don't know how this going to be met with an increasing demand.
• Without the proviso we would have lost 10% of our budget. We need to be able to maintain the services we provide.
• Have any of the Vocational Rehabilitation Services been cut?

Hutchinson (July 10, 2002):

Stakeholders attending: Horizons Mental Health, Red Cross, Reno County CDDO, TECH, First Call for Help, New Beginnings Homeless Shelter, Department of Aging, Reno County Health Department, and the Home Healthcare Connection. In total we had 13 Stakeholders attend along with the Hutchinson Leadership Team.

Identify the most significant (3-5) impacts and implication related policy changes made by the 2002 Legislature in order to FY 03 budget reduction in your community(s). List specific examples.

• Pharmacy and care management changes will significantly impact the clients who need these services. Clients can't afford $2 co-pay when they have multiple medicines on fixed income. Pharmacies may choose not to be medicaid providers with reduced reimbursement rates. Clients turn to community funds for help with prescriptions, which shifts community funds that would have been used for assisting individuals with rent, utilities, and food. One local community provider stated payment of medications is their highest expenditure. Long term solutions needed for those customers who need maintenance medication. The drug pre-authorization process is not timely and leaves clients waiting when in real need of immediate medication or treatment. Many clients unable to go through the many "hoops" required to get formulary drugs.
• Payment or service reductions or client fees associated with some changes in the PD Waiver, HCBS, MR/DD Wavier, NFMH, SED waiver and LSH all target very vulnerable populations. PD waiver and HCBS changes eliminates the number of providers available because cost exceeds reimbursement. Cuts force elderly to assisted living and adult care homes facilities which is more costly than home care. Reno county has 15-20 on waiting list for MR/DD waiver, and this does not take into account new clients in need of services. Residents from Reno county must go out of county for NFMH services. NFMH have limited space and preference for servicing own residence first. Example of one juvenile who was resident of state hospital for many years and upon release was only approved for 9 months at a NFMH, which was insufficient to meet her transitional needs. Hutchinson used to have over 20 children and adolescents at LSH, but due to SED waiver now only 2 to 4 at any given time. Changes will impact this. Rumors noted due to funding issues that LSH will close the children's ward and move them with the adolescent population. Much concern expressed about the danger of this action.
• Family preservation has been a saving link for families in this community. Changes will create community problems as families will be no longer be on these services resulting in children in out of the home placements. Foster care is much more costly than in home services. Foster care is experiencing a 2% decrease currently.
• Time limited GA changes will be a huge concern in two years. It was noted that SSI/SSDI approval is a very lengthy process. Legal service is very key player in this process. The community will feel the impact on local funds when these individuals are cut.
• Reduction of Child Care Grants will impact quality of local child care providers. This has a negative impact for children in child care, especially those who are on child subsidy programs who are often from single parent households and disadvantaged due to low income. Children in child care are at a very critical time of their development.

Should the 2003 Legislature change any other the policy decisions that were made?

• Need to recognize that some of the changes result in just transferring higher expenditures to other arenas. Problems still exist. Some examples were given. Family Preservation changes could mean more children in higher cost foster care. More LSH treatment might happen with SED Wavier changes. Changes with the PD services, Hospice or formulary drugs may force higher cost hospitalization. HCBS changes could push clients to more expensive adult care home. Stakeholders expressed that they pay taxes with expectation for funding of needed services. If not funded, then asking question if they will get some of that funding back locally to address the additional community needs resulting from these changes.

For consideration of the 2003 Legislature, what are the lowest and highest priorities for continued series? What service gaps exists?

• LSH cuts are dangerous to children and adults with mental illness. It does not work to cut staff and reduce beds.
• Waiting lists create real safety issues for those who not have family supports. The local shelter is full so where can these individuals go?
• How will the elderly manage. They need to have the choice to stay at home as compared to more costly adult care home. Screening process for adult care home needs to be improved.
• Service gap: The community does well in sharing information with each other but could look at improving on coordinating multiple services or how we deliver services. We need to find ways to connect so can intervene quicker with families.

Identify what steps the community needs to take to prepare for the immediate budget crisis and what steps can be taken to deal with the policy changes likely to be taken by the 2003 legislature?

• Advocate to change the cold weather rule with KCC. Individuals result in very high bills as a result of this rule. Adaption of rule should look to protect those very vulnerable.
• Inform the community what is happening. Many are not aware if they are not within the social service community or have family or friend impacted. Even if not concerned for humanitarian reasons, will be due to personal taxes and other resulting community costs.
• Organize community group that actually coordinates services, rather than just sharing information. Possible strategy could include: Identify our community needs, identify existing programs that serve those needs, establish where actual gaps in services exist and establish means to fill those gaps.
• -United Way is working with a software program "Tapestry" that brings community social services together and delves into funding raising and interactive fund raising. They currently have funds only to include 5 community agencies ($14,000.00 and then $500/mo to maintain). New Beginnings is going to set up another meeting (Tapestry) of interested agencies/programs so that other can learn more about this and perhaps consider participating.
• We struggle with how to define our community - is it Hutchinson, Reno County, catchment areas, county based – this makes it more difficult when you face the task of replicating effort in each community. Example - Horizons covers 5 counties, SRS covers 7 counties, TECH covers only Reno County. This splits our focus and makes it hard for people to commit time, energy and leadership to this community effort.
• Transportation is a critical piece - recently we became aware of an issue with RCAT - how does a single mom with 2 kids or even 1 baby use RCAT. She has to carry the baby, the car seat, her purse, diaper bag, etc..... Possible solution might be to have 1-2 car seats on each RCAT bus?? A community effort perhaps.
• There are 217 stand alone agencies in Reno County. We are not making the connection of the delivery of services. Move towards being person oriented rather than agency oriented.
• There is a huge educational component and learning curve for changing. True change takes years, not months or a few preliminary efforts. A lot of resistance is out there.
• United Way - locally funds 32 major agencies. City of Hutch is considering the distribution of their social service funds to United Way and then having UW spread them to the agencies of the community.

Next Steps:

• Investigate TAPESTRY software and United Way. New Beginnings is going to set up another meeting (Tapestry) of interested agencies/programs so that other can learn more about this and perhaps consider participating.
• Make sure our local legislators know / see the local community impact of cuts. Make sure they feel they are a part of the community and thus, a part of the solution to community problems. A one on one effort is needed.

Back to Map