FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Contact: Chris Hilderbrant
Office: (585) 546-7510

August 23, 2010

Center for Disability Rights reacts to court hearing with Judge John Ark

(Rochester, NY) – The Center for Disability Rights today announced that it is pleased with the outcomes of today’s hearing with State Supreme court Justice John Ark. While disappointed that Monroe County has chosen to implement stall tactics in order to avoid discussing the content of CDR’s lawsuit against Monroe County, CDR indicated that it believes that today’s hearing was supportive of its case. CDR was forced to file the lawsuit after Monroe County refused to discuss its decision to end its contract with CDR to provide Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program (CDPAP) services.

In its efforts to end its contract with CDR, Monroe County has destabilized the services of nearly 300 people who have consistently chosen CDR as their vendor. “This is not just a contract dispute, this is my freedom, my choice. Who is Maggie brooks to choose for me?” said Carmen Hernandez, who has received her CDPAS services from CDR for nearly 12 years. “CDR has supported me in many ways; I want to stay with them.”

With approximately 15 CDR CDPAP consumers in the court room, Monroe County touted that approximately 163 consumers have responded to Monroe County’s letter directing them to choose a new vendor by August 23rd. CDR’s attorney clarified that over 120 have not yet responded. Karen Schiess, of Brighton, directs the services for her daughter who has a disability and is attending college in the area. Ms. Schiess stated after the hearing that “I returned the vendor choice letter because Monroe County said that otherwise we’d be dropped from the program. I felt compelled to follow the county’s rules but I want my daughter to keep getting her services through CDR.”

One important victory for Ms. Schiess and other consumers who want CDR as their vendor took place near the end of the hearing. In response to questions asked by Judge Ark, Monroe County’s attorneys stated that no one’s services would be discontinued for not responding to the letter sent by Monroe County. This letter had stated that if consumers did not respond by picking a new vendor (implied to be by August 23rd), the county would assume that the consumer no longer wants CDPAP and their services would be ended.

Approximately 40 consumers have indicated to CDR that they never received the letter extending the August 1st deadline to August 23rd.

Monroe County also acknowledged that in order to discontinue someone’s services, a written notice would have to be given ten days in advance and that such notice would also have to inform the consumer of the consumer’s right to request a Fair Hearing and to continue receiving the services until the hearing is held and a decision reached.

In an effort to have CDR’s lawsuit dismissed from NYS Supreme Court, Monroe County’s attorneys attempted to make the case that it had no contract with CDR. This argument was made despite the county’s own admissions that Monroe County wrote a contract and sent it to CDR near the end of 2009; CDR signed and returned that contract unedited in January 2010, within about seven days of having received it; and that Monroe County’s Commissioner of the Department of Human Services, Kelly Reed, did sign that contract and transmit it to the New York State Department of Health. CDR’s lawyers argued that this situation clearly represents a contractual relationship. “In the statewide context of carefully monitoring Medicaid programs for possible fraud, waste or abuse, I am shocked that Maggie Brooks would have her attorneys construct an artificial argument that means she allowed a multi-million dollar Medicaid program to operate without a contract for nearly two and a half years,” said Chris Hilderbrant, CDR’s Chief Operating Officer.

Additionally, in her July 14, 2010, letter to County Executive Brooks, DHS Commissioner Kelly Reed refers to the “contract” between her agency and CDR.

Judge Ark reserved his decision and requested more time to contemplate the arguments presented today, in addition to the materials previously submitted by each side. Judge Ark and the attorneys for each side will be in contact with one another until the Judge announces his decision.

– 30 –